NOTE: I debated on if this needs to go into Great Debates or BBQ PIT since I’m not, necessarily, judging people but trying to understand their viewpoints… so mods, if you feel it’s getting toasty, please move it to the PIT.
Okay, so… I have a theory.
I like to think that, for the most part, we, the dopers, have a thing for seeking facts and truth and making as informed a decision as we can (With some subjectiveness tossed in).
That said: Are any dopers big Trump supporters? Because, if there’s one thing Trump is not about, it is facts and thoroughness.
So I’m curious, if you REALLY LOVE THIS BOARD and pretty much WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT, please explain how you can be behind the stuff that Trump is saying with 100% no facts or proof behind them.
I didn’t vote for Trump (I voted 3rd party.) But it is entirely possible to support Trump and be a 100% factual person.
Suppose someone holds stock in a particular company that Trump is likely to support. Then he could be a True Doper ***and ***support Trump ***and ***be 100% factual.
Suppose someone just really, really likes to see the political left throw a fit. Then he could be a True Doper ***and ***support Trump ***and ***be 100% factual.
Suppose someone wants to see America’s support go into major decline worldwide. Then he could be a True Doper ***and ***support Trump ***and ***be 100% factual.
I don’t agree with your argument, because that wouldn’t make them one hundred percent behind Trump. They are behind Trump and each of your circumstances for one particular reason which may or may not override any other issues you would have with him.
My question moreso focuses on the idea that anyone who truly looks to fax and Truth such as most of us here on the Straight Dope message boards, kama can actually defend trumps recent statements allegations and thoughts about the media about judges about anything where he provides absolutely no facts and no proof.
I think you could believe that facts and truth have great value, but that certain political goals are more important, and believe that despite Trump’s lack of care for the former, he will accomplish the latter.
I think you could believe that whether you think Trump believes the nonsense he spouts or is just playing people. If he’s going to do the things you want done, it’s not unreasonable to support him.
A True Doper would point out that it’s 'bated breath, short for abated, meaning held. It’s not baited breath, which means that the breath in question smells like minnows or worms, depending on where you were fishing.
ISTM the OP is conflating “Pro-Trump” with “agrees with everything Trump says”, as other posters have alluded to.
But leaving that aside, what interests me more is the notion that “true Dopers” are all about facts and truth and thoroughness. This is mostly just a self-delusion. People like the notion that merely by signing up for a membership on a MB they can be part of a club of truth seekers and ignorance fighters, thereby achieving the right to claim those attributes for themselves. In reality the majority of Dopers don’t have anything approaching these qualities.
I do agree that on average Dopers have these qualities more than the population as a whole. But that’s not saying much, and certainly the notion that there’s this “true Doper” who has all these qualities is laughable and only true in a purely tautological way.
I think the OP is saying that don the con is destructive and corrupt, according to his own words and deeds, before and after the election. I think he is saying that dopers represent a certain rational approach which is non self-destructive and also non-destructive of the country. You might support him for some material end, but you got to have mixed feelings about the long term effects. Unless someone wants to step in and fill the breach and explain the positivity of donnie. But this has been asked before here.
My Dad, a PhD in math/Masters in physics who was a world leading research scientist in a couple fields before he retired*, voted Trump.
Dad is all about facts. He didn’t vote Trump based on facts (or non facts) that Trump spouts. He voted for Trump because, given the two major party candidates, he decided Trump was the lesser of two evils.
I suspect that there are large number of people who voted for Trump who fall into this category. I also suspect that had the Ds nomiated someone other than Clinton, like maybe O’Malley, Trump would have had his ass kicked.
Also, what Fotheringay-Phipps said.
Slee
Nuclear safety, computer modeling (including climate models, interestingly enough, for nuclear war scenarios) and rocket science*. He did lots of interesting stuff. Like this.
** He was an actual, honest to god, rocket scientist for a while.
I See where you said you had a theory, but not where you said what it was.
Anyway, I have an observation of my own to suggest for your consideration. I know of a number of Trump supporters, and one thing that many of the most enthusiastic ones have in common, is that they KNOW that Trump lies all the time, and is bombastic and so on, but they excuse all that as “technique.” A sort of “Art Of The Deal” thing, if you will.
I wouldn’t be surprised. There’s plenty of people who only care about their own agenda even if it means turning a blind eye to truth and logic. Especially republicans.
This. I voted against Hillary, not for Trump (and for what it’s worth my state went blue, so I can claim it made no difference). I think Trump is a blowhard, incapable of being even another Huey Long let alone another Adolf Hitler. His own pick for a Supreme Court justice voiced his disapproval of Trump’s attacking judges who disagree with him. His cozying up with Russia has put him at odds with his own party. The sheer venom the left feels for him means he’ll be fought at every step. His more grandiose ambitions will founder on the rock of insufficient funding. I’d say Trump himself is less a threat to the left than the Republican-majority Congress.
Those people, I would argue, do not fit in at the Straight Dope, because they don’t fit with its primary purpose. They’re okay with deliberately spreading ignorance as some sort of “technique.”
I think embracing the motto of “fighting ignorance” is a good definition of “true Doper.” And, hence, I think the OP has merit.
This is not a fallacy, as we’re not saying “no Dopers,” finding out there is an exception, and then changing it to “no true Dopers.” We’re starting with a reasonable definition.
The only counterargument would be if someone could actually believe Trump is not spreading ignorance. But I’m not sure that positions is tenable to any fact-based person. Not after all the straight out lies he’s given since the inauguration.
That’s what I’m looking for. I understand the reasons people voted for Trump. Were it ANY OTHER CANDIDATE running against her, I would not have voted for Hillary. Third parties still don’t hold a chance to really win a presidential race, so please don’t come at me in regards to that. My goal was to not have Trump in the WH. That failed. Fine. I can do what I can to move along.
But he has been lying, and continues to lie. And, it seems, will not stop, and also DEFENDS THE LIES.
That, alone, goes against every principle that the Straight Dope is about.
So, I understand Hatred of Hillary, sick of government’s ignoring the common folk, etc, and that being why you voted for Trump. But, are you okay with what he has been doing since day 1 as president (not the policies/bans/etc.)? His outright lies and ignorance of facts?
I’m looking to understand the reasoning behind a Straight Doper who is okay with it, and why.
I worry more about Pence kicking off the end of secular government than I do about Trump digging himself into a lame duck presidency and funneling a bunch of money into his businesses for four years. And, of course, I would rather see a successful and positive Presidency than not.
So…that’s not really pro-Trump in any way, but I would hope that he learns, adapts, gets smart, and does a few good things before being voted out.
And I do accept that sometimes good results can come of misguided intentions. Getting the rest of the world to contribute to global security, for example, is probably a good thing. Today, if the US fell, there’d be no one to step in and fill the power gap but Russia and China. Trump’s desire to step out of the Global Leadership role - while undertaken for silly reasons - still might have good results in the long run, by convincing Europe to start taking the rest of the world seriously.
